O ink-stained historians, hear my supplication!
The legend of King Canute (or, delightfully, "Cnut") is known to every man, woman, boy, girl, dog cat and fish in Britain. This is the story of the great king who had his throne placed on the beach, to demonstrate that he could hold back the tide.
Of course he got his feet wet, and is now a byword for vainglorious folly.
But I read once that his motive was not to test his power but to demonstrate his mortal nature to courtiers who believed that he actually could hold back the tide.
What do we know about the courtiers or subjects of King Cnut that may have made him feel that such a piece of theatre was of need? What attitudes and beliefs would have centred on this powerful personage? Might be have actually believed himself that he could hold back the tide?
So that I can set my jingoism correctly, geographically where might this event have happened, if it is known to history?
I'd love to know what kind of man he was. I read a puckish sense of humour in his action, with a side of "I'm not the Messiah!"
The episode in question firstly appears in two Anglo-Norman sources, namely Historia Anglorum by Henry of Huntington and L'Estoire des Engleis (in Old French) by Geoffrey Gaimar, about a century after Cnut's death. It is also worth noting that Henry adds a little aftermath that Cnut ceased to put his crown afterward and instead put it on the crucifix first in his third reduction of the work in ca. 1140.
So, Finlay suggests the possibility that the original story came from the milieu of a kind of Saint's life in later Anglo-Saxon England. The contemporary texts like ASC tend to be concise during his reign, and I personally doubts the historicity of this episode itself (Bolton's latest biography on Cnut also omits the allusion to the episode If I remember correctly).
Historians also offers vastly different interpretations of this episode.
But I read once that his motive was not to test his power but to demonstrate his mortal nature to courtiers who believed that he actually could hold back the tide.
While the majority of scholars agree that the possible purpose of this episode for Cnut himself (or the image of Cnut by later authors) to show the performative (theatrical) piety, the emphasis on the different understandings of royal power between the king and the courtiers does not probably dates back to pre-1066 period - Finlay points out Hume's influence on such kind of interpretation.
On the other hand, Parker argues that Cnut's original intention was to present himself as a worthy sea-ruler, traditional image of the ruler in Old Norse world, to his followers. In her understanding (citing contemporary Old Norse poems for the ruler's representation of a sea ruler), the primary intended spectators of this 'show' might have been Scandinavian military retinue who served Cnut as a member of lithsmen (housecarls) in his fleet (Parker 2014: 279-85; Cf. Frank 1994).
Parker also comments on this episode as following:
"Far from being a rebuke to Cnut's Danish followers, the story might instead be a reassurance to them, reinforcing in the strongest terms.....power is due to the one who rules the seas (Parker 2014: 281)."
Both contemporary (pre-1066) and post-conquest (Anglo-Norman period) texts also agree that Cnut had been interest in presenting himself as a a generous benefactors to the church, probably from a political point of view, and Lawson mainly incorporate this story into the section on Cnut's church policy (Lawson 2011: 125, note 72).
geographically where might this event have happened,
Gaimar (linked to the pages of the old English translation) sets the place in question on banks of the Thames in London (near Westminster).
I'd love to know what kind of man he was.
Bolton (author of the latest biography on Cnut) presents him primarily as a cunning politician/ tough negotiator, and I largely follow his interpretation in the following two previous question threads and answers to them:
References: